[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: splitting experimental by arch?



> 
> AFAIR, we already had agreed on a definition like this: experimental
> is only for `dangerous' software, which is likely to damage your system.
> Every thing else (even alpha versions) may go into unstable.

How about "known to be broken in a fundamental way". It's really a matter
of degree. For example, an xemacs package that still has a few rough edges
and bugs in its MULE support goes into unstable. An xemacs package that
can't be used to edit straight ascii text anymore would go into
experimental. A dpkg-ftp which can't even be used to upgrade your system
successfully (i.e. 1.5.0) goes into experimental. etc.

How about

  unstable: yeah, it dumps core when you do Control-Shift-Meta-F12, the
menu entry is broken and there's a missing symlink that makes the urlview
helper program unusable, but it mostly work. You can still do productive
work with that package.

  experimental: once you've installed this version, don't expect to be able
to do productive work with the package. (And that's if you're lucky. If
you're unlucky, it'll eat /dev/hda for lunch.) The main reason you might
want to install this is to help me get it into an at least somewhat usable
state.

Hopefully someone can rephrase the distinction in more generic terms.

  Christian

Attachment: pgpba5Ib98SpA.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: